President Donald Trump issued an executive order on Friday directing the installation of signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History that caution visitors about what his administration views as inaccuracies in the museum’s portrayal of American history. The signage, to be placed along National Park Service-managed walkways leading to the museum, is intended to highlight White House critiques and guide the public to alternative resources that the administration deems more accurate.

The order tasks Interior Secretary Doug Burgum with erecting these temporary signs, which state that the museum’s exhibits require renovation and provide information on what the administration describes as authoritative accounts of America’s past. This directive represents a significant escalation in a campaign lasting over a year and a half, during which the Trump administration has conducted extensive reviews of Smithsonian content, threatened funding cuts, and successfully influenced leadership changes within the institution.

In justifying the move, Trump cited a report from the White House Domestic Policy Council titled “Saving America’s Story,” released on July 4. The report asserts that Smithsonian leadership treats American history not as a unifying national legacy but instead as a tool to promote social justice and radical societal transformation. A White House statement accompanying the order further accused the museum of engaging in extreme political activism, alleging its approach is rooted in Marxism and serves to divide and demoralize Americans. The administration also criticized the museum for insufficiently honoring the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence during the nation’s 250th anniversary celebrations and instructed Burgum to install supplementary exhibits or signage on Park Service land countering what it labels as inaccurate information inside the museum.

The Smithsonian Institution declined to comment on the new directive. Museum officials have previously maintained that the White House report mischaracterizes their work and emphasized their commitment to accurate, nonpartisan scholarship.

The executive order was met with immediate criticism from Democratic lawmakers and historians. Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-New Mexico), ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, denounced the order as an egregious political overreach driven by ideology rather than fact. She maintained that Smithsonian museums belong to the American public and not the executive branch.

Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association, described the plan to place government-approved alternative narratives at the museum’s entrance as unprecedented and disrespectful to the institution’s professionals. She underscored that while the Smithsonian has navigated contentious historical debates before, including controversies over the Enola Gay exhibit, no prior administration had attempted to publicly contest the museum’s narrative so directly. According to Weicksel, the White House’s narrow interpretation of patriotism conflicts with the founders’ understanding that love of country involves acknowledging its shortcomings. She expressed concern the administration’s actions risk eroding public trust in a key cultural and educational institution that has served scholars and educators for more than 150 years.

Some conservative voices welcomed the order. Mike Gonzalez, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation who participated in recent congressional hearings on the Smithsonian, praised the directive’s call for officials, including Domestic Policy Council chief Vince Haley, to use “any and all available authorities” to enforce corrections to museum content. Gonzalez described the planned signage as a “clever” strategy and suggested that removing current leadership would be a desirable outcome of the order.